One of our wags on here suggested a way of getting rid of MON is retiring him.... a tongue in cheek suggestion may I say! I'm sure he can be sacked if required?
A retirement package or sacking may not be necessary. We will still need to find a replacement for him and frankly it is up to Ryles and the CEO to say we need more in the position of GM Football.
Hard to argue with that need face value, me as a past supporter of MON having suggested previously that I am surprised he still with us.
I have also thought in recent times that he has been kept because he had a focus on the total scene, grade and junior developments,
Interesting in the sense that everyone rubbishes him on his negotiating ability. We really cannot judge him on that, as it is subjective. Many on here will say he can be judged and he has failed.
Frank the Tank made a defence for him based that it is a hard job if your hands are tied. We won't argue that one with Wiz but I do not hold him totally responsible and the so called abject failure's of R&R, LB made the point that our recent signings and success gives him a success that has not been aknowledged.
Just to throw another opinion in......How's this sound?
I wonder if we should get someone like an ex or current player manager just to do contract negotiations and leave MON with the overview football role. Once they agree on who they want let the assigned Head Hunter can go after the target..... and/or have the same person quietly make it known who we don't want. It can be a totally different player management philosophy.
Maybe we can loan juniors/development players to Perth or PNG on the same basis that Melb seem to do it. Also it is someone who can monitor who is after our juniors and what defences do we have to combat and manage them.
This type of role fundamentally doesn't necessarily sit as an automatic for a good General Manager Football and maybe this ancillory management role is a good way to go.
Replies
After reading that Yehez, I am thinking you missed the whole point of the blog.
I will start by going back to the very end of your post. i.e. ""MON seems to be just "doing a job". In short he's not a limiting factor in my view to us improving. At least in the short term.""
I think you mean to say he is a limiting factor.......my blog is addressing his limiting factor.
I did like the term ""master negotiator": by the way.....Haven't thought of it in that context.
WEll now, I did mean what I said, but maybe it was jumbled.
I do not see MON as someone limiting us improving from where we are now to say being a top 6 club. Can he keep the grades connected long term for sustained success? He's done OK with that for now, but it needs to be better. Can he win races for top players that are "final pieces of the jigsaw" that can get us to grand finals? Jury is still out there.
But what I know is that I'd prefer an O'Neill that can "run the club" and make sure it is always functioning irrespective of the coach, rather than a splashy manager that gets all kinds of big deals or a coach who controls everything and everything unravels once he leaves. We need to use Ryles' to build for after Ryles. is MON up to that?
There are a lot of question marks, but I do not know who out there we are sure can do better than MON, and more improtantly, how do the people above MON see it? Are they up to picking a good general manager?
Finally, I do think we should keep our purse tight and not overspend. That part of our negotiating I am happy about it, but the 1M for Galvin worries me. He was not worth it. We should stick to our guns.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next